> > I want to respond to by Mark and Ben here: > > > Your state capitalism, moreover, is superior to other capitalisms: "The > Bolshevik government did ten times more--ten times faster--to modernize > and industrialize Russia--than the Provisional Government would or could > have ever done." This statement is unprovable and specifying the factor of > 10X makes it worse. > >
I agree with Mark. And it is simply a ridiculous comparison. There was simply no one "Provisional Gov't" but several over it's less than a year in existence...and, it lasted only 9 months or during the height of the world war. > > > But it's your treatment of "productive forces" that I want to better > understand. Your essay gives productive forces independent agency: > Productive forces such as "copper and tin ... want to be free... to create > things that humans want or need." We know today that the well-being of > humanity depends on the well-being of an ecosystem that depends on > creatures other than humans. Our productive forces are causing mass > extinctions and heating the planet beyond what its current inhabitants can > tolerate. > > Today, any treatment of productive forces needs to address the destruction > of our ecosystem by capitalist technologies and commodities. It's not so > much that our fossil-fuel technologies want to create things we need, but > the social relations must change in order to stop their further > development and retire many of the most destructive productive forces. We > need to change social relations in order to eliminate many capitalist > productive forces rather than to unleash them. > > Again I agree with Mark here while allowing for some literary excess by Ben. But, not necessarily agreeing with Mark: not just under capitalism...it was a true under workers states/"really existing socialism" as it is under capitalism. I would argue however it is now the "productive forces" per se, but how those productive forces are developed and under what incentive. I totally disagree with Mark's undefined "...in order to stop their further development...". Again, it is the "how" they are developed, not the broad sweep of ALL development. Just to get off of fossil fuels we need to develop other techniques that don't heat up the climate (low carbon generation for example). Marx's "unleashing of the productive forces" (and Lenin's and Trotsky's and ALL communists of the classical period) is simply about lifting the masses of humanity out of poverty. We need to do it in a truly productive manner that is congruent with the environment. David > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#40947): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/40947 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/118133214/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
